>This one is from Peter Kater's "Gateway" ca. 1988 (Gaia/Polygram>Records). This one may in fact exist on CD, so somebody may be able>to check perceived speed stability and etc. against the CD. The song>is from side 1, track 2 titled "Talk Back.">>This one was also most likely recorded to digital before pressing the>LP, and I'm not responsible for any possible digital ugliness you may>hear ;-).>>Wish I could post longer samples, but space and downloading time>constraints prevent it. As again, this one is about 3.5MB in size,>and requires the LPAC decoder, available here:>>http://www.nue.tu-berlin.de/wer/liebchen/lpac.html>>The sample itself can be downloaded here:

I time aligned it as best I could. The sample is about 34 secondslong. The vinyl version takes about 60 msec longer to complete thanthe CD version, so the speed accuracy of the turntable is about 0.2%on the slow side if the CD can be considered the reference.

I applied -0.43 dB to the left channel of the CD version, and +0.26 dBto the right channel. The volume was compared with the vinyl versionvia average RMS. WavGain (which uses David Robinson's replaygainalgorithm) gives about the same answer as average RMS.

I applied a linear fadeout to about the last 4 seconds of the sampleto approximate what Moi had done with his sample.

I won't say what I hear just yet. If you think the difference issufficiently subtle to warrant the use of a double-blind tool, visitone of the following sites:

Could you provide a sample of the piano solo in the end of current sample?

I only have the CD, not the LP, so I couldn't provide samples of both to compare unless Moi makes more available. Also, perhaps the end of this sample may be problematic, since I had to guesstimate how Moi did his fade.

All of the above would only be fair assuming that the equalization wasn't twiddled with between the different formats. But in real life, this often happens, especially when a recording is re-released and re-mastered. Older vinyl recordings, unless of the "audiophile" variety were often made from a second-generation analog master (or worse).

This comparison is probably:

vinyl from digital master vs. CD from digital master, although the CD doesn't have a code on it, so it could be an analog master. There's no telling how the equalizations differed between the two. But at least both CD and LP were from the same year.

Still, I wouldn't take this comparison too seriously, not knowing all the details. It's just for your entertainment.

Hehe, most vinyl sound so good,because they were made only with analog technology.

Mixing digital and analog is the weak point in most mastering studios...They don't use good DACs/ADCs/filters. (Around here, that is.)<edit>Especially AD conversion is messed up. (Look at my flag...)</edit>

But properly recorded, 100% digitally made CDs beat vinyl...(means: are more accurate, have better dynamics, are more resistant to wear)Been there, heard that.

@ff123: Are you sure that this CD is not a remastered version?<edit>Heh, I'm writing too slow...So this is a digital recording.</edit>

Another question: Will there ever be a Linux version of your abc/HR utility?I will try to port it with dumb interface (command-line, no ncurses,ASCII-art, no gpm support(cause I can't code that yet )

This post has been edited by Bedeox: Apr 1 2003, 17:00

--------------------

I've changed only because of myself.Remember, when you quote me, you're quoting AstralStorm.(read: this account is dead)

Most Vinyl tracks I have heard sound superior than that of CD. I do not believe this means vinyl is technically better. My Vinyl rips recorded at 24 bit, dithered to 16 bit, sound better than original CD's. I believe this is because sound engineers master CD for todays tiny stereos, radio, car and portable players. The CD format is not weak, its the usage of unnatural dynamics compression and eq by engineers that make vinyl sound better.

@ff123: Thanks, these utils are great, but none shows probability...and none can compare multiple files. That's why I'll make my own product...(wxWindows 2.4.0, platform-neutral, statically linked versions will be avaliable... command line later)The problem is, that these are LARGE (1MB at least...Sorry, ld (GNU linker) includes too much of wxWindows code even with minimal samples.Luckily they seem to not grow much with increasing complicity.)

<edit>@Pio: The server is very slow... That version will download whole day </edit>

This post has been edited by Bedeox: Apr 1 2003, 18:43

--------------------

I've changed only because of myself.Remember, when you quote me, you're quoting AstralStorm.(read: this account is dead)

No other webspace lets me upload files bigger than 1 MB. It's not the server itself, I just downloaded it in less than 60 seconds (very max speed of my 512 kbps line). It must be the ISP connection with the web, too bad...If someone with a better server sends me his mail by PM, I can mail it.

Hehe, I see what you did, Pio. I was thinking of doing something similar myself. This version sounds quite close to pksample.pac, and really does warrant the use of ABX. It's not quiet in my house right now, but I'll try to give it a go later.

I definitely hear the higher frequencies in the CD version much better. The two samples are definitely different enough not to need ABX, in my opinion.

However, the vinyl is nowhere near unlistenable (somebody had a good clean pressing too). Since I've been listening mostly to vinyl the past couple years, CD's have begun to sound uncomfortably "chiseled" to me (maybe due to the wider frequency extension, possibly to some other factors). The vinyl sounds "mellower" and easier on my ears, although somewhat less detailed and 'receded'. It may just be a matter of getting/being used to listening to one rather than the other.

It should be noted perhaps that we're hearing a CD (digital) vs. "vinyl recorded to digital" (lord knows what ADC was used) -- so it isn't a true comparison of vinyl vs. CD. Interesting exercise nonetheless.

Edit -- sounds like the frequency balance of the vinyl is pretty good, being well under 1dB difference in channels compared to the CD version (assuming the same balance was used on both the vinyl and CD recordings... seems logical).

Hehe, I see what you did, Pio. I was thinking of doing something similar myself. This version sounds quite close to pksample.pac, and really does warrant the use of ABX. It's not quiet in my house right now, but I'll try to give it a go later.

Pio, you're good. I don't believe I can tell the difference between your sample and the vinyl version.

Have a fun... You can find cases when a LP sound better than CD (the same interpret and title) but from technical point of view is LP inferior to CD, so where's the problem? I used to be a vinyl freak (as I own more than 5000 LPs) but I would never switch back to LP now as I know how good a CD may sound when properly done.